Are we living in a post-industrial/information society, radically different in structure from the industrial age?
Just as the automobile replaced the horse or the smartphone substituted the pigeon, regardless of what influences force such a change, it would appear as though change, or rather evolution, is unavoidable. Such is the nature of our society as a whole. Popularised by the sociologist Daniel Bell in his book The Coming of Post-Industrial Society, the post-industrial, or information society, is argued to be the third phase in societal evolution. This essay will argue for the existence of a post-industrial/information society, radically different in structure from the industrial age.
(For the sake of time and words this essay will …show more content…
For example Switzerland has increased reliance on information based jobs such as banking and finance and Norway has an occupational society that is varied. Both countries are capitalist yet “no one has suggested that… [Switzerland]… is a fundamentally different society” (p. 50). Bell (1980) argues that changes occurring along one axis can suggest a new social definition while other axis remain the same. I believe this to be an acceptable rationale. There are some countries that are more developed and have entered the new era and there are those that are still predominantly industrial. Hypothetically looking back, when the first country became economically involved in industrial manufacturing and others were still in predominantly agricultural, it would have been fair to say that country had independently entered a new era. Even though their cultural and social orders may have remained …show more content…
One of the theories critiques is that the theory of an information society was simply the answer provided to a time when technological advancements were causing an unsettling period of change (Webster, 2002). I agree that it was simply a theoretical answer to change, however I argue that most forms of societal change are due to advancements of some nature. There were likely those that theorised the industrial society upon the invention of the printing press, the fact that they were made in the face of change does not make them any less relevant or likely to occur. Giddens (2013) argues that we are not entering a new information society but rather a society where the changes that are occurring are simply being more “radicalised and universalised” than in the industrial society (p. 2). In this case the ability for the consequences of change to be more universalised is arguably to do with the accessibility and increase in information. And that if we are not moving into a new era away from the system “based upon the manufacture of material goods” (p.2), could the moving into an era more universalised due to access to information not still be considered a new era of radical change? The ability for people to communicate these radicalised alterations is an indication of changes in the way we operate culturally and socially, and thus indicates the ability to redefine
Just as the automobile replaced the horse or the smartphone substituted the pigeon, regardless of what influences force such a change, it would appear as though change, or rather evolution, is unavoidable. Such is the nature of our society as a whole. Popularised by the sociologist Daniel Bell in his book The Coming of Post-Industrial Society, the post-industrial, or information society, is argued to be the third phase in societal evolution. This essay will argue for the existence of a post-industrial/information society, radically different in structure from the industrial age.
(For the sake of time and words this essay will …show more content…
For example Switzerland has increased reliance on information based jobs such as banking and finance and Norway has an occupational society that is varied. Both countries are capitalist yet “no one has suggested that… [Switzerland]… is a fundamentally different society” (p. 50). Bell (1980) argues that changes occurring along one axis can suggest a new social definition while other axis remain the same. I believe this to be an acceptable rationale. There are some countries that are more developed and have entered the new era and there are those that are still predominantly industrial. Hypothetically looking back, when the first country became economically involved in industrial manufacturing and others were still in predominantly agricultural, it would have been fair to say that country had independently entered a new era. Even though their cultural and social orders may have remained …show more content…
One of the theories critiques is that the theory of an information society was simply the answer provided to a time when technological advancements were causing an unsettling period of change (Webster, 2002). I agree that it was simply a theoretical answer to change, however I argue that most forms of societal change are due to advancements of some nature. There were likely those that theorised the industrial society upon the invention of the printing press, the fact that they were made in the face of change does not make them any less relevant or likely to occur. Giddens (2013) argues that we are not entering a new information society but rather a society where the changes that are occurring are simply being more “radicalised and universalised” than in the industrial society (p. 2). In this case the ability for the consequences of change to be more universalised is arguably to do with the accessibility and increase in information. And that if we are not moving into a new era away from the system “based upon the manufacture of material goods” (p.2), could the moving into an era more universalised due to access to information not still be considered a new era of radical change? The ability for people to communicate these radicalised alterations is an indication of changes in the way we operate culturally and socially, and thus indicates the ability to redefine